This resonates with me. Rephrasing your thoughts in my own words:
-
Passive investments logically won’t reliably generate a return, only active investments can (i.e. you can’t get something for nothing)
-
Currently passively investments are used to escape inflation – this arguably creates allocation of capital where it shouldn’t be allocated (housing, stocks)
-
Despite this downside, one possible claim is that inflation is needed to ensure stable pricing of products, wages, loans.
-
We can get the best of both worlds by pricing these things in fiat (inflationary), but always saving/settling in BTC (deflationary)
However in bitcoin terms, the new exchange rate and their wages/income being fixed in dollar terms, would mean that they receive less BTC every month, making it harder to continue to grow their savings in percentage terms
I would argue this is already the case today, since many people have a large part of their savings in passive investments.
agree to coordinate automatic mild price cuts (in BTC terms) via their national central bank
Do you think this type of agreement won’t arise from the free market and has to be managed by a central bank?
Lastly, just to add a bit of nuance that I’m sure you’ll agree with, I’ll say that I don’t think everyone will want to hold their full savings in BTC – some will prefer to pay a percentage to hedge away the volatility.